The Baylor Report and the Importance of Informing The School

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 26, 2016

Having now read the Baylor report, I'd like to draw attention to a problem that likely infects many athletic departments: the propensity to believe you can be the judge and jury without notifying anyone outside the athletic department.

You hear this mindset in what are now common coachspeak statements, namely, "We're aware of the situation, and will handle it internally."

Well, that's just what got Baylor thumped. From the report:

-"In some instances, the football program dismissed players for unspecified team violations and assisted them in transferring to other schools. As a result, some football coaches and staff abdicated responsibilities under Title IX and Clery; to student welfare; to the health and safety of complaintants...."

In other words, nothing to see here, folks. An unspecified team violation occurred, and the player is now gone. Case closed.

-"In addition to the failures related to the sexual assault and dating violence, individuals within the football program actively sought to maintain internal control over the discipline for other forms of misconduct. Athletics personnel failed to recognize the conflict of interest in roles and risk to campus safety by insulating athletes from student conduct processes."

Translation: Don't tell anyone outside the program/department what the player has done happening; we've got him covered

-"Football coaches and staff took affirmative steps to maintain internal control over discipline of players and to actively divert cases from the student conduct or criminal processes."

That one doesn't need explanation; it speaks for itself.

-..."football coaches and staff had inappropriate involvement in disciplinary and criminal matters or engaged in improper conduct that reinforced an overall perception that football was above the rules, and that there was no culture of accountability for misconduct."

Let us talk to the police/D.A. about it with you/for you. To me, this is the most damning thing about what has happened at OU with the president, AD, and head coach going together to the D.A.'s office...and, in a manner of weeks, the D.A.'s office offering an Alford Plea to the player who broke the girl's face.

As I've argued before, Baylor is just trying to get with and keep up with the OU's and Texas' of the world. Having the hometown police and D.A.'s in your pocket is just an expected thing.

How much longer will that last after this? I think, if anything, this shows that the Baylor BOR does not put football over the school's best interests. Will it catch on? Or, at schools like OU and Texas, whose winning traditions far exceeds that of new kid in town Baylor, is the horse gone from the barn for so long that there isn't any use in trying to find it?

Personally, I think at Texas and OU, its going to take something major outside force to move them. Baylor's BOR hired an outside firm to conduct this interview, gave them access, and apparently, are agreeing with their findings to the extent of really doing something.

What this should be showing other schools and their athletics' departments is this:
(1) Athletic departments, regarding discipline, you cannot function as islands unto yourselves any longer, and
(2) Schools, you can no longer turn a blind eye to what is happening in your own backyards for the sake of protecting that "winning tradition/image."

I think this is the beginning of the end of "we're handling it internally."

Edited May 26, 2016 by MeanGreenMailbox

Harry · May 26, 2016

Good post and I totally agree.

TreeFiddy · May 26, 2016

To me, this proves that the Baylor BOR will ignore it as long as possible until they are caught red handed and are having national shows publicly blast your program.

I cannot believe that the AD and Starr still have jobs. I really can't

Wag Tag · May 26, 2016

28 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Having now read the Baylor report, I'd like to draw attention to a problem that likely infects many athletic departments: the propensity to believe you can be the judge and jury without notifying anyone outside the athletic department.

You hear this mindset in what are now common coachspeak statements, namely, "We're aware of the situation, and will handle it internally."

Well, that's just what got Baylor thumped. From the report:

-"In some instances, the football program dismissed players for unspecified team violations and assisted them in transferring to other schools. As a result, some football coaches and staff abdicated responsibilities under Title IX and Clery; to student welfare; to the health and safety of complaintants...."

In other words, nothing to see here, folks. An unspecified team violation occurred, and the player is now gone. Case closed.

-"In addition to the failures related to the sexual assault and dating violence, individuals within the football program actively sought to maintain internal control over the discipline for other forms of misconduct. Athletics personnel failed to recognize the conflict of interest in roles and risk to campus safety by insulating athletes from student conduct processes."

Translation: Don't tell anyone outside the program/department what the player has done happening; we've got him covered

-"Football coaches and staff took affirmative steps to maintain internal control over discipline of players and to actively divert cases from the student conduct or criminal processes."

That one doesn't need explanation; it speaks for itself.

-..."football coaches and staff had inappropriate involvement in disciplinary and criminal matters or engaged in improper conduct that reinforced an overall perception that football was above the rules, and that there was no culture of accountability for misconduct."

Let us talk to the police/D.A. about it with you/for you. To me, this is the most damning thing about what has happened at OU with the president, AD, and head coach going together to the D.A.'s office...and, in a manner of weeks, the D.A.'s office offering an Alford Plea to the player who broke the girl's face.

As I've argued before, Baylor is just trying to get with and keep up with the OU's and Texas' of the world. Having the hometown police and D.A.'s in your pocket is just an expected thing.

How much longer will that last after this? I think, if anything, this shows that the Baylor BOR does not put football over the school's best interests. Will it catch on? Or, at schools like OU and Texas, whose winning traditions far exceeds that of new kid in town Baylor, is the horse gone from the barn for so long that there isn't any use in trying to find it?

Personally, I think at Texas and OU, its going to take something major outside force to move them. Baylor's BOR hired an outside firm to conduct this interview, gave them access, and apparently, are agreeing with their findings to the extent of really doing something.

What this should be showing other schools and their athletics' departments is this:
(1) Athletic departments, regarding discipline, you cannot function as islands unto yourselves any longer, and
(2) Schools, you can no longer turn a blind eye to what is happening in your own backyards for the sake of protecting that "winning tradition/image."

I think this is the beginning of the end of "we're handling it internally."

Interesting that Starr initiated the independent investigation only to be caught up in this and demoted? Seeing the report I would think he would of fired AB. Conspiracy... Their group of 17 thought letting Starr go would silence the nay Sayers! Backfire!

UNT90 · May 26, 2016

What will be interesting is to see if the NCAA will place Baylor on probation.

If they do, I bet the sanctions are worse than what Pedo St. ended up with.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 27, 2016

14 hours ago, UNT90 said:

What will be interesting is to see if the NCAA will place Baylor on probation.

If they do, I bet the sanctions are worse than what Pedo St. ended up with.

Agree. To me - and, perhaps, this is how naïve I am even as I approach 50 - this is worse than the pay-for-play scandal that took down SMU in the 1980s. I was in high school back then, and it was really big news. How can covering up sexual assaults, and dissuading victims of sexual assaults, be lower on the NCAA Death Penalty totem pole that handing cash and prizes to Eric Dickerson & Co.?

Also, I wonder how many other athletic departments are having "Oh, Sh*t!" meetings this morning. You have to figure that once the victims from the Baylor sexual assaults start appearing on the talk show circuit (circus?) that other coeds similarly assaulted and ignored at other campuses will begin to come out of the woodwork.

Where people who want to masturbate on airplanes might mumble, "Thanks a lot, Bin Laden!" you will then have many athletic directors and football coaches mumbling, "Thanks a lot, Baylor!"

UNT90 · May 27, 2016

2 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Agree. To me - and, perhaps, this is how naïve I am even as I approach 50 - this is worse than the pay-for-play scandal that took down SMU in the 1980s. I was in high school back then, and it was really big news. How can covering up sexual assaults, and dissuading victims of sexual assaults, be lower on the NCAA Death Penalty totem pole that handing cash and prizes to Eric Dickerson & Co.?

Also, I wonder how many other athletic departments are having "Oh, Sh*t!" meetings this morning. You have to figure that once the victims from the Baylor sexual assaults start appearing on the talk show circuit (circus?) that other coeds similarly assaulted and ignored at other campuses will begin to come out of the woodwork.

Where people who want to masturbate on airplanes might mumble, "Thanks a lot, Bin Laden!" you will then have many athletic directors and football coaches mumbling, "Thanks a lot, Baylor!"

No team will ever get the death penalty again. The NCAA set a terrible precedent when they didn't give it to Pedo St. They can't give it to anyone now, not even a school that dared not to know its place.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 27, 2016

15 hours ago, Wag Tag said:

Interesting that Starr initiated the independent investigation only to be caught up in this and demoted? Seeing the report I would think he would of fired AB. Conspiracy... Their group of 17 thought letting Starr go would silence the nay Sayers! Backfire!

I want to say this about Ken Starr - he doesn't seem all that hip, if you know what I'm saying. Not Travis Bickle hip, anyway.

And, so, I think that's why he's such an easy target. He looked really, really stupid in the Baylor get-up at the football games. It was like a forced act for him to be there. Like, sports doesn't seem to have really be his thing and he didn't really know how to act there.

"Here, Mr. Starr...here's a Baylor shirt and hat, be at the stadium at Kickoff O'Clock, because...well, you're the president now. Also, loosen up a little...have a Mountain Dew and some Pixy Sticks to get the blood flowing a little."

I think he really just didn't pay attention. I look at Starr as the anti-David Boren, the OU president who is up to his elbows in the athletic department, commenting publicly about the team, the conference realignment issues, etc. Starr never, to me, seemed to be a sports-savvy president.

I believe Starr thought he was doing the right thing by having the independent investigation. I don't think he ever imagined it would cost him his job. In that way, I think he was naïve about the power of college athletics when you begin to be a Big Boy at the highest level.

Again, that's why I said earlier, one of the takeaways for the college presidents has got to be, you can't just sit back and just run the academic side and be satisfied that the athletic department is going to instinctively do the right thing.

Cerebus · May 27, 2016

4 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

I want to say this about Ken Starr - he doesn't seem all that hip, if you know what I'm saying. Not Travis Bickle hip, anyway.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 27, 2016

9 minutes ago, UNT90 said:

No team will ever get the death penalty again. The NCAA set a terrible precedent when they didn't give it to Pedo St. They can't give it to anyone now, not even a school that dared not to know its place.

That's probably true. And, even now, we're learning just how long Penn State knew about Sandusky's problem and ignored it. Shameful.

But, look...you know the game. I've got family in Oklahoma. Some went to OU, some to OSU...they will defend their criminal players to the end, all the while pointing fingers at Texas, Penn State, Alabama, or anyone else whose program has criminals or gets caught cheating in recruiting and whatnot.

You damn well know Texas alumni and OU alumni and A&M alumni who defend their criminals and the coaches, staff, and schools who hide/protect them. They are all over the Metroplex. You might work with one or two who are snickering at Baylor now like the hypocritical goatasses they are.

Baylor tried to run with that pack. They were far less experience in covering up. Or...they didn't know (yet) how to pay off victims as well as the Texases, OUs, and A&Ms of the world.

4 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

Yeah...and, so are these guys:

Look...Rick Perry is so hip, he doesn't even have to have an "All Access" pass strapped on!

UNT90 · May 27, 2016

9 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

That's probably true. And, even now, we're learning just how long Penn State knew about Sandusky's problem and ignored it. Shameful.

But, look...you know the game. I've got family in Oklahoma. Some went to OU, some to OSU...they will defend their criminal players to the end, all the while pointing fingers at Texas, Penn State, Alabama, or anyone else whose program has criminals or gets caught cheating in recruiting and whatnot.

You damn well know Texas alumni and OU alumni and A&M alumni who defend their criminals and the coaches, staff, and schools who hide/protect them. They are all over the Metroplex. You might work with one or two who are snickering at Baylor now like the hypocritical goatasses they are.

Baylor tried to run with that pack. They were far less experience in covering up. Or...they didn't know (yet) how to pay off victims as well as the Texases, OUs, and A&Ms of the world.

Work with someone who makes no bones about it and is celebrating Baylor's downfall. They know the deal.

meangreendork · May 27, 2016

1 hour ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Agree. To me - and, perhaps, this is how naïve I am even as I approach 50 - this is worse than the pay-for-play scandal that took down SMU in the 1980s. I was in high school back then, and it was really big news. How can covering up sexual assaults, and dissuading victims of sexual assaults, be lower on the NCAA Death Penalty totem pole that handing cash and prizes to Eric Dickerson & Co.?

Also, I wonder how many other athletic departments are having "Oh, Sh*t!" meetings this morning. You have to figure that once the victims from the Baylor sexual assaults start appearing on the talk show circuit (circus?) that other coeds similarly assaulted and ignored at other campuses will begin to come out of the woodwork.

Where people who want to masturbate on airplanes might mumble, "Thanks a lot, Bin Laden!" you will then have many athletic directors and football coaches mumbling, "Thanks a lot, Baylor!"

I feel like if a smaller program pulled a Baylor or a Penn State, or a USC, they'd be shutdown. But the NCAA won't risk the cash-cows.

TreeFiddy · May 27, 2016

If there are any schools out that that have potentially negative news, they need to get it out there today while the media isn't looking.

Cr1028 · May 27, 2016

I've got a serious question about the whole situation and hope one of you can clear things up for me. Why would a victim of sexual assault make her complaint directly to the football staff and not law enforcement? Football staff would clearly be biased. I can't imagine anyone who was a victim of rape to say, "no, I don't want him to go to prison, I just want his football career to end". It just doesn't make sense to me. Now, if these women reported these assaults to Baylor PD or Waco PD and they turned it over to the football staff, the person responsible for handing over the investigation to football staff should be imprisoned.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 27, 2016

50 minutes ago, Cr1028 said:

I've got a serious question about the whole situation and hope one of you can clear things up for me. Why would a victim of sexual assault make her complaint directly to the football staff and not law enforcement? Football staff would clearly be biased. I can't imagine anyone who was a victim of rape to say, "no, I don't want him to go to prison, I just want his football career to end". It just doesn't make sense to me. Now, if these women reported these assaults to Baylor PD or Waco PD and they turned it over to the football staff, the person responsible for handing over the investigation to football staff should be imprisoned.

I've got a serious question about the whole situation and hope one of you can clear things up for me. Why would a victim of sexual assault make her complaint directly to the football staff and not law enforcement? Football staff would clearly be biased. I can't imagine anyone who was a victim of rape to say, "no, I don't want him to go to prison, I just want his football career to end". It just doesn't make sense to me. Now, if these women reported these assaults to Baylor PD or Waco PD and they turned it over to the football staff, the person responsible for handing over the investigation to football staff should be imprisoned.

Here's my opinion/guess and it's just that, based on having been a college student who had sex in college sex-type situations:

(1) You have a situation where two people obviously had sex after some sort of flirting/relationship. As far as I've seen from the facts, these weren't random rapes like, say, in the non-college world. Recall a few years back, there was a guy in Dallas breaking into random apartments and raping women.

(2) Given that their was some sort of relationship, you get the sticky, "he said/she said" deal going. Girl, now regretting the sex or feeling violated by it, goes to an authority she perhaps feels like will take away his most valuable possession - his athletic scholarship - as a means for revenge.

(3) "He said/she said" scenario in full play, coach calls in player and gets his side of the story, which is probably somewhere along the lines of, "Hey, we dated (or something like that) and it was consensual" or "we were at a party and drinking and then we did it, but it was consensual."

Okay, fine...everything fine so far? In the twisted, old school athletic kind of way? But, here's the problem:

(4) Athletic departments now have Title IX and Clery to follow and are expected, even in "he said/she said" to really turn the investigation over to the school, and

(5) Schools are expected, under Title IX and Clery, to really investigate...including going to legal authorities!

Now look, it's not hard to figure out how these things happen. In spite of whatever "we're all equal now" sex talk there is, that isn't really the case when it comes right down to the nitty-gritty...and, that is why there are these laws like Title IX and Clery - to protect women.

After regretful sex, a guy is expected to just shake it off as a drunken mistake or, even sober, a lapse in judgement, etc. Women - and, athletes have to be told this, they must be told this by every coaching staff with brains in their heads - have actual legal avenues to pursue if they have regretful sex. And, so, athletes...do what Young MC rapped about in the early 90s,"keep it in your pants."

Now, I'm not saying all of these were instances of regretful sex. You asked how could the women involved not go straight to the police. I'm saying, probably based on prior or current relationships with the players gone sour. I think if a prowler came, broke into a dorm or apartment, and raped...yes, they'd go straight to the police.

There are whole areas of academic and criminal studied about this thing - date rape, rape by acquaintances, even marital rape. Often, the women feel shame because of the relationship and are hesitant to go to the police, so they go to other sources they feel might validate their feelings. It's complicated emotionally, to be sure - and, especially for the girls - but not legally.

But, that's the stink of it, if you are a player. Is it a double standard? Probably. But, whether it is or is not, in this country, we have laws to cover it. Baylor didn't follow those laws.

Cr1028 · May 27, 2016

2 hours ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Here's my opinion/guess and it's just that, based on having been a college student who had sex in college sex-type situations:

(1) You have a situation where two people obviously had sex after some sort of flirting/relationship. As far as I've seen from the facts, these weren't random rapes like, say, in the non-college world. Recall a few years back, there was a guy in Dallas breaking into random apartments and raping women.

(2) Given that their was some sort of relationship, you get the sticky, "he said/she said" deal going. Girl, now regretting the sex or feeling violated by it, goes to an authority she perhaps feels like will take away his most valuable possession - his athletic scholarship - as a means for revenge.

(3) "He said/she said" scenario in full play, coach calls in player and gets his side of the story, which is probably somewhere along the lines of, "Hey, we dated (or something like that) and it was consensual" or "we were at a party and drinking and then we did it, but it was consensual."

Okay, fine...everything fine so far? In the twisted, old school athletic kind of way? But, here's the problem:

(4) Athletic departments now have Title IX and Clery to follow and are expected, even in "he said/she said" to really turn the investigation over to the school, and

(5) Schools are expected, under Title IX and Clery, to really investigate...including going to legal authorities!

Now look, it's not hard to figure out how these things happen. In spite of whatever "we're all equal now" sex talk there is, that isn't really the case when it comes right down to the nitty-gritty...and, that is why there are these laws like Title IX and Clery - to protect women.

After regretful sex, a guy is expected to just shake it off as a drunken mistake or, even sober, a lapse in judgement, etc. Women - and, athletes have to be told this, they must be told this by every coaching staff with brains in their heads - have actual legal avenues to pursue if they have regretful sex. And, so, athletes...do what Young MC rapped about in the early 90s,"keep it in your pants."

Now, I'm not saying all of these were instances of regretful sex. You asked how could the women involved not go straight to the police. I'm saying, probably based on prior or current relationships with the players gone sour. I think if a prowler came, broke into a dorm or apartment, and raped...yes, they'd go straight to the police.

There are whole areas of academic and criminal studied about this thing - date rape, rape by acquaintances, even marital rape. Often, the women feel shame because of the relationship and are hesitant to go to the police, so they go to other sources they feel might validate their feelings. It's complicated emotionally, to be sure - and, especially for the girls - but not legally.

But, that's the stink of it, if you are a player. Is it a double standard? Probably. But, whether it is or is not, in this country, we have laws to cover it. Baylor didn't follow those laws.

Wow, really good explanation. Thank you.

Christopher Walker · May 27, 2016

2 hours ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Here's my opinion/guess and it's just that, based on having been a college student who had sex in college sex-type situations:

(1) You have a situation where two people obviously had sex after some sort of flirting/relationship. As far as I've seen from the facts, these weren't random rapes like, say, in the non-college world (??). Recall a few years back, there was a guy in Dallas breaking into random apartments and raping women.

(2) Given that their was some sort of relationship, you get the sticky, "he said/she said" deal going. Girl, now regretting the sex or feeling violated by it, goes to an authority she perhaps feels like will take away his most valuable possession - his athletic scholarship - as a means for revenge. (!?!)

(3) "He said/she said" scenario in full play, coach calls in player and gets his side of the story, which is probably somewhere along the lines of, "Hey, we dated (or something like that) and it was consensual" or "we were at a party and drinking and then we did it, but it was consensual."

Okay, fine...everything fine so far? In the twisted, old school athletic kind of way? But, here's the problem (??):

(4) Athletic departments now have Title IX and Clery to follow and are expected, even in "he said/she said" to really turn the investigation over to the school, and

(5) Schools are expected, under Title IX and Clery, to really investigate...including going to legal authorities!

Now look, it's not hard to figure out how these things happen. In spite of whatever "we're all equal now" sex talk there is, that isn't really the case when it comes right down to the nitty-gritty...and, that is why there are these laws like Title IX and Clery - to protect women.

After regretful sex, a guy is expected to just shake it off as a drunken mistake or, even sober, a lapse in judgement, etc. Women - and, athletes have to be told this, they must be told this by every coaching staff with brains in their heads - have actual legal avenues to pursue if they have regretful sex. (WTF.) And, so, athletes...do what Young MC rapped about in the early 90s,"keep it in your pants." (...)

Now, I'm not saying all of these were instances of regretful sex. You asked how could the women involved not go straight to the police. I'm saying, probably based on prior or current relationships with the players gone sour. I think if a prowler came, broke into a dorm or apartment, and raped...yes, they'd go straight to the police.

There are whole areas of academic and criminal studied about this thing - date rape, rape by acquaintances, even marital rape. Often, the women feel shame because of the relationship and are hesitant to go to the police, so they go to other sources they feel might validate their feelings. (!?!) It's complicated emotionally, to be sure - and, especially for the girls - but not legally.

But, that's the stink of it, if you are a player. Is it a double standard? Probably. But, whether it is or is not, in this country, we have laws to cover it. Baylor didn't follow those laws.

No.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 27, 2016

2 minutes ago, Christopher Walker said:

No.

Alrighty, then, you answer his question: Why did the girls go to the athletic department instead of the police?

Christopher Walker · May 27, 2016

13 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Alrighty, then, you answer his question: Why did the girls go to the athletic department instead of the police?

It's not fair to speculate. Your synopsis however reeks of victim blaming.

Cerebus · May 27, 2016

10 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Alrighty, then, you answer his question: Why did the girls go to the athletic department instead of the police?

Some of them went to the police, some went to the Title IX office, some went to various Baylor counseling services, some went their parents. Some did go to the coaching staff, but which is a more reasonable explanation: That they didn't want their name to be made public and dragged through the mudand they just wanted the coaching staff to kick the player out of the school (which did happen several times) or that is what some insane conspiracy theory they cooked up?

The questions you are asking could have been answered in about 10 minutes of googling, instead you spent more than that amount time typing up some uninformed theory.

How about you:

Read the Baylor Finding of Facts which has been available to anyone with an internet connection, which you so obviously have.
Take your medication and stop changing the name you keep posting under.

The same goes for everyone else. Have some facts to post? Go ahead. Have some crazy conspiracy theory to push without you having even a basic grasp of the actual recorded facts? Don't.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 27, 2016

1 minute ago, Cerebus said:

Some of them went to the police, some went to the Title IX office, some went to various Baylor counseling services, some went their parents. Some did go to the coaching staff, but which is a more reasonable explanation: That they didn't want their name to be made public and dragged through the mudand they just wanted the coaching staff to kick the player out of the school (which did happen several times) or that is what some insane conspiracy theory they cooked up?

The questions you are asking could have been answered in about 10 minutes of googling, instead you spent more than that amount time typing up some uninformed theory.

How about you:

Read the Baylor Finding of Facts which has been available to anyone with an internet connection, which you so obviously have.

Take your medication and stop changing the name you keep posting under.

The same goes for everyone else. Have some facts to post? Go ahead. Have some crazy conspiracy theory to push without you having even a basic grasp of the actual recorded facts? Don't.

The police would have publicly named the victims?

Also, take your own medication. I have none. I'm not the one zealously banning people because I disagree with or misunderstand what they've posted. If you want to discuss further in PM, do so. But, whatever, quit acting like I've changed names simply to change names.

Cerebus · May 27, 2016

3 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

The police would have publicly named the victims?

OMG you are right! No one who ever reports a crime that would assuredly cause a huge media storm could ever get named in any way shape or form. And absolutely no gossip would circulate on a college campus!!!!1!

You have changed my mind entirely. Please tell me how to subscribe to your poorly xeroxed newsletter. But first take your medication.

ETA: Of course, for our own protection, we should never talk about this theory in public again. Please tweet me directly at @DwainPrice to discuss this further.

5 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

But, whatever, quit acting like I've changed names simply to change names.

Can you tell me why you keep changing names? Is it the voices? Are they telling you to change names? Are they telling you to do anything else? Like hurt yourself or anyone else? It's OK, we're all friend here, we can talk.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Cerebus

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 27, 2016

https://rainn.org/get-information/legal-information/reporting-rape

I know the person who hurt me.
About 2/3 of victims know the perpetrator. It can be unnerving to be violated by someone you know. Regardless of who the perpetrator is, sexual assault is against the law.

I’ve been intimate with the perpetrator in the past, or am currently in a relationship with the perpetrator.
Sexual assault can occur within a relationship. Giving someone consent in the past does not give them consent for any act in the future. If you did not consent, they acted against the law—and you can report it.

So...there's that. Although, I'm not sure you'd recognize the Rape Abuse & Incest National Network as a worthy source.

Cerebus · May 27, 2016

8 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

https://rainn.org/get-information/legal-information/reporting-rape

I know the person who hurt me.
About 2/3 of victims know the perpetrator. It can be unnerving to be violated by someone you know. Regardless of who the perpetrator is, sexual assault is against the law.

I’ve been intimate with the perpetrator in the past, or am currently in a relationship with the perpetrator.
Sexual assault can occur within a relationship. Giving someone consent in the past does not give them consent for any act in the future. If you did not consent, they acted against the law—and you can report it.

So...there's that. Although, I'm not sure you'd recognize the Rape Abuse & Incest National Network as a worthy source.

So are you saying you disagree with what the Rape Abuse & Incest National Network? With what do you disagree? That a person can be raped by someone who they know? Or that a person can give consent for one act, and then be raped later on when they do not give consent to another act?

ETA: Some of your reasoning is way off base. Plenty of men and women have been forcibly raped by a stranger and then been too ashamed or embarrassed to report the crime.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Cerebus

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 27, 2016

No. I've given the same scenario that RAINN discusses on their website.

"You have a situation where two people obviously had sex after some sort of flirting/relationship. As far as I've seen from the facts, these weren't random rapes...."

" Now, I'm not saying all of these were instances of regretful sex. You asked how could the women involved not go straight to the police. I'm saying, probably based on prior or current relationships with the players gone sour."

" There are whole areas of academic and criminal studied about this thing - date rape, rape by acquaintances, even marital rape. Often, the women feel shame because of the relationship and are hesitant to go to the police...."

Original question from CR:

"Why would a victim of sexual assault make her complaint directly to the football staff and not law enforcement? Football staff would clearly be biased. I can't imagine anyone who was a victim of rape to say, "no, I don't want him to go to prison, I just want his football career to end"